From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12775 invoked by alias); 9 Aug 2006 18:10:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 12732 invoked by uid 48); 9 Aug 2006 18:10:05 -0000 Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 18:10:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060809181005.12730.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-08/txt/msg00689.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #2 from tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de 2006-08-09 18:10 ------- > One problem without using -tranditional-cpp is that some tokens in C are not > tokens in Fortran so you could get the wrong result. This is why > -tranditional-cpp is used. I though the -lang-fortran, which is passed (according to gfortran -###), takes care of this? > There is no standard for Preprocessed Fortran Source at all. Well, that I assumed. But it is still (somehow) based on ISO C's preprocessor. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662